Day: August 24, 2017

Good Governance, Smart Land Use

Johns Creek Post – Holding the Powerful Accountable in Our Sister City

Posted on by Milton Coalition

JC_Post_Logo2-e1439759369243

August 24, 2017.

(You’ll want to read to the end.  The video at the end is must-see tv.)

Today, I wanted to direct you to a story from the Johns Creek Post, which is a website in Johns Creek devoted to City government issues.  Similar to this blog, the Johns Creek Post has a mission of holding government officials–especially elected representatives–accountable.  I have been subscribing to the JCP for the last three months and have been comforted knowing there are other concerned citizens actively engaging their government in our sister cities.  If you are not getting enough of your local government fix from this blog, I highly recommend subscribing to the JCP.

“Motor Court” Homes Proposed For Bell Road: Denied

The JCP‘s story concerns a high density development that a developer proposed in Johns Creek.  There was strong opposition from local residents.  Sensing that he would lose the vote before Council, the developer requested to withdraw his proposal and was granted his request.  It is important to understand that a City Council can reject such a withdrawal request, discuss the developer’s proposal, and accept/approve the developer’s proposal.  However, if the developer’s proposal is rejected, he has to wait a year before submitting another proposal for that particular property.  However, when a request for withdrawal is granted, the developer can immediately come back with a modified proposal.  As the JCP noted, this submit-and-withdraw tactic is one of many used by developers to wear down citizen opposition.

download

We see similar tactics used in Milton.  A variation of this tactic is constantly morphing rezoning applications.  I have seen rezoning applications (e.g., the Ebenezer Road rezoning) that were constantly revised during the vetting process, including during the final days before the rezoning was heard by Council.  And to add insult to injury, citizens are not informed of these changes unless they are constantly calling Community Development and asking about changes.  And often, the changes are not “tracked,” meaning that a citizen cannot easily compare the latest version of an application to previous versions.  Sometimes the zoning process feels like a game of whack-a-mole.  The reality is that citizens do not have the time and expertise to continuously monitor and react to constantly changing developer proposals.  Zoning processes need to be reformed to level the playing field for citizens.  Furthermore, Council needs to be alert to manipulative tactics by developers and take actions to ensure citizens’ interests are protected.

I have attended quite a few contentious zoning hearings.  The one common denominator has been citizens’ frustration.  Not because of the outcome, but because citizens felt unfairly treated.  What is needed in Milton is a top-to-bottom review with an objective of making zoning processes more citizen-centric.

*****************************************************************************

Johns Creek Post – Part 2

JC Town Hall

Following is more exciting post from the JCP.  It still shocks me to see elected officials attack citizens in this manner.  (Perhaps I am mistaken, but it seems some profanity might have muted in this video.)

Viral Video: Town Hall Meltdown

Of course, we have witnessed similar behavior in the past year from three Council Members in Milton, despite a policy approved by Council in February 2016 that stressed the importance of government officials, including elected representatives, being deferential to citizens.  Although do we really need a policy that states that elected officials should be respectful and courteous in their interactions with constituents?  Shouldn’t this be obvious to our elected officials?  Thin-skinned, ego-driven politicians probably need to find another line of work.

Tim Becker

Smart Land Use

Townhouses Across From CHS Epitomize Debate Over Land Use in Milton

Posted on by Milton Coalition
CHS Town Homes
Townhouse development across from CHS.  Want more of this?

August 24, 2017

Nothing epitomizes the debate in Milton over land use more than the townhouse development across from Cambridge High School (CHS).  I have not met a single citizen that approves of what has become a very visible eyesore in Milton.  However, there was a silver lining in that property’s rezoning.  The rezoning battle marked a turning point in the discussion over land use in Milton.  The seeds were sown for what has become a citizens’ revolt against reckless development in Milton.

The CHS rezoning followed a classic pattern that has played out repeatedly in Milton.  The Planning Commission–our commission dedicated to land use issues and appointed by Council–unanimously recommends against a rezoning (or ordinance, etc.).  Citizens overwhelmingly oppose the rezoning.  Ignoring both the Planning Commission and citizens, Council approves the rezoning, with little or no rebuttal (or even acknowledgement) of the Planning Commission and citizens’ objections.  With the CHS rezoning, Council Member Matt Kunz even bragged that the rezoning had preserved greenspace.  What greenspace is he referencing . . . that thin strip of land along Cogburn Road, perhaps?

old grungy wood background texture

Of course, the apologists for the CHS development have their excuses all lined up for why they were “forced” to approve the CHS rezoning.  The first excuse is a classic that we hear repeatedly.  Some Council Members will tell you that the City would have been sued by the developer/property owner and would have lost.  This is malarkey.  Want to guess how many times in 11 years the City has been sued over a zoning action and lost?  ZERO.  This excuse simply does not hold water.  And in any case, the threat of a lawsuit should not matter.  Our Council needs to have the courage to do the right thing—whether a lawsuit is a real threat or not.

The second excuse implicitly acknowledges that the CHS development is an eyesore.  However, the nearby residents are blamed for rejecting supposedly more palatable options, such as a senior living facility and a church.  However, this was a false choice.  The CHS property was zoned AG-1, meaning that homes on one-acre lots was the default option.  Instead of (a maximum of) 8 or 9 homes on one-acre lots, we got 27 town houses.  The developer was gifted three times the density he was allowed under existing zoning.

568409

So what is the point of this cautionary tale?  The point is that development is Issue #1 in Milton.  There is still a lot of undeveloped land in Milton.  If we build out the remaining land at 2-3 times the density allowed under AG-1, our quality of life is going to suffer.  Think about (more) congested roads, (more) overcrowded schools, and decreased property values.  You don’t have to look far—Alpharetta, Roswell, Johns Creek—to see the pernicious effects of unconstrained development.  We can still tread a different development path in Milton.  However, time is running out.  Now is the time for City Council to adopt a zero-tolerance policy for these irresponsible rezonings.  Council needs to JUST SAY NO.

Tim Becker